This post is more than 5 years old
86 Posts
0
1148
Two Equally LUNs are seen the same way by the system
Disk /dev/emcpowerc: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/emcpowerc1 1 133674 1073736373+ 83 Linux
.....
Disk /dev/emcpowerd: 984.7 GB, 984756256768 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 119723 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk /dev/emcpowerd doesn't contain a valid partition table
.....
The problem is that last LUN is introduced recently. On navisphere EMC manager 6.26.24. both LUNs are of disks of 456,6GB capacity. Both are SATAII and RAID10. The first LUN is with 14 Disks, while the second one is with 4 disks. The LUNs (Drives) are not seen as if they are the same capacity, although there is not much of difference between their capacity.
The first one is with user blocks: 2147483648
User capacity: 1024 GB
Raw Capacity 2048GB
The Second one:
The first one is with user blocks: 1923352064
User capacity: 917.126 GB
Raw Capacity 1834.251GB
Why they are not of the same capacity?
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 06:00
as long as you have enought capacity in the raid group it does not matter how many disks it contains. Try to enter this value in blocks
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 04:00
are you looking at LUN properties or RAID group properties ?
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 04:00
I am looking at LUN properties
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 05:00
so which device was introduced last and where do you see the discrepancy ?
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 05:00
Sorry I have included abriviated version. That is what you are asking:
"Disk /dev/emcpowerb: 572.1 GB, 572136620032 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 69558 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/emcpowerb1 1 69558 558724603+ 83 Linux
Disk /dev/emcpowerc: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/emcpowerc1 1 133674 1073736373+ 83 Linux
Disk /dev/emcpowera: 71.5 GB, 71517077504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 8694 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/emcpowera1 * 1 13 104391 83 Linux
/dev/emcpowera2 14 8694 69730132+ 8e Linux LVM
Disk /dev/emcpowerd: 984.7 GB, 984756256768 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 119723 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk /dev/emcpowerd doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/emcpowere: 71.5 GB, 71517077504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 8694 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk /dev/emcpowere doesn't contain a valid partition table"
I am not in the control of that system. Another company owns password etc. I believe that they have powerpath over there.
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 05:00
The old drive same RAID10 and SATAII etc
Disk /dev/emcpowerc: 1099.5 GB, 1099511627776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 133674 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/emcpowerc1 1 133674 1073736373+ 83 Linux
I have created the following:
Disk /dev/emcpowerd: 984.7 GB, 984756256768 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 119723 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk /dev/emcpowerd doesn't contain a valid partition table
They should both 1099.5GB. I guess?
the good one on LUN properties:
"User blocks: 2147483648
User capacity: 1024 GB
Raw Capacity 2048GB "
The recently created by myself - second one is:
"User blocks: 1923352064
User capacity: 917.126 GB
Raw Capacity 1834.251GB"
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 05:00
are you sure /dev/emcpowerd is the second LUN ? fdisk says it's 984G while Navi says it's only 917G ..something is not right. Do you have PowerPath on this system? Can you post "powermt display dev=all" output.
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
1
April 15th, 2010 06:00
the one you created is much smaller. If you like both to be identical size, you can actually specify blocks whenever you create a new LUN.
dynamox
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
20.4K Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 06:00
in order to unbind a LUN your first need to remove it from the storage group.
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 06:00
I have created another raid group more and LUN for that created group. Everything seems to be the same. I have tried to unbind that LUN but of no avail. When I select Enterprise-Storage-Storage Groups, then select newly created storage group, and select that particular LUN (only one in the group), click right mouse and choose "Unbind" . That generates: Error:Unbind LUN:"LUN XX is contained within a storage group". I do not know the way to unbind that LUN? Am I missing something?
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 06:00
It works fine with unbind. Ok I have recreated LUN and on USER Capacity of LUN Properties I typed on User Capacity: 1024 GB, but it did not accept it but generated invalid LUN capacity: "Please enter an integer beween 1 and 917BG". To point to the fact: The first LUN is of 14 disks: SATA|| while the new LUN contains only 4 disks. The disks are 458.6GB capacity. Still, that goes back to raid groups?
pereubu
86 Posts
0
April 15th, 2010 07:00
It is solved. Thanks
kelleg
4.5K Posts
0
April 16th, 2010 11:00
Raid 1/0 - only two disks for total capacity - max size will be 917.13 - you can choose MAX in the size selection field
glen
SKT2
2 Intern
2 Intern
•
1.3K Posts
0
April 23rd, 2010 04:00
"fdisk says 984G while Navi says its only 917G.. Something is not tight".. Linux meassure them using 1000 based unit prefixes while Clar does it with 1024 based unix prefixes.